Briefly Noted
The genome of Neanderthals, which are classified as a separate species, is over 99% indentical to that of modern humans. More proof that “race doesn’t exist.”
Comments are closed.
Copyright © 2024 | WordPress Theme by MH Themes
Briefly Noted
The genome of Neanderthals, which are classified as a separate species, is over 99% indentical to that of modern humans. More proof that “race doesn’t exist.”
Comments are closed.
Copyright © 2024 | WordPress Theme by MH Themes
The fact that such a small amount of DNA can make such a large difference does prove PURE race in a creationist sense does not exist. In the overall layout and structure, there is no race but in detail-orientation, a small amount of individual genes define racial characteristics. Had a God created the genome, the structure would be logical and each gene would correspond to logic. But the genome is obviously a product of trial and error and the races are obviously a cumulative product of differentiation of individual genes consequentially, rather than beings differentiated by overall chromosome structure. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. One bad genetic error can take a genius and give him downs syndrome. Likewise the environmental pressures in a Darwinist sense shaped the human being to the environments of West Eurasia, East Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. It is true that most of the genes of all human beings are the same, but by that token, humans are similar to chimps, apes and even rats too.
In other words, pure races don’t exist, but cumulative racial characteristics do exist and the environment has effected the accumulation of these characteristics over time. Simply put, human beings have adapted to their environments into Caucasoids, Mongoloids, and Negroids (and can be broken down even further), even if underneath the shell they are all human beings.
Metal Gear told me to post on this blog, so I want to show you that there’s no stopping globalization. We will have a one world government and mix races together whether through consent or conquest.
Globalism is inevitable: http://www.freemediaproductions.info/Editorials/?p=315
Race does not exist, there’s ample evidence and I have the backing of mainstream and reputable geneticists and organizations:
Prominent anthropologist C. Loring Brace: “There is no such thing as a biological entity that warrants the term ‘race.’”
The American Association of Physical Anthropologists recently announced: “old biological concepts of race no longer provide scientifically valid distinctions…”
The American Anthropological Association published that “differentiating species into biologically defined ‘races’ has proven meaningless and unscientific as a way of explaining variation.”
The New York Times has hailed Genes, Peoples, and Languages, the new book by Professor Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0865475296/ref=sim_books/103-0702805-3403066], the dean of population geneticists, for “dismantling the idea of race.” In the New York Review of Books, Jared Diamond salutes Cavalli-Sforza for “demolishing scientists’ attempts to classify human populations into races in the same way that they classify birds and other species into races”
Cavalli-Sforza himself wrote: “The classification into races has proved to be a futile exercise.” He says his research will “undermine the popular belief that there are clearly defined races, to contribute to the elimination of racism. The idea of race in the human species serves no purpose.”
The word “race” has no biological definition.
The classification “race” is only applied to humans and is therefore not a general term of biology. In other species we talk of “subspecies” and occasionally “breed” (the result of deliberate breeding efforts). These are terms that are defined in terms of genetic isolation, and therefore do not apply to humans. If we were to apply the same concepts of classification to our own species that we do to every other species on the planet (the system of Order, Family, Genus, Species, Subspecies), the word “race” would have no meaning.
Or to put it another way, there are more points of genetic variation between two random human beings, than there are between two “races.” The genomes of two “white” people will vary in hundreds of places that determine height, weight, hair color, size of ears, predisposition to baldness or cancer or depression, body hair, length of the third finger, artistic ability, left-handedness, etc. While the genomes of all “white” people differs from those of all “black” people in only a few dozen places (like chromosome 8).
The genetic differences you cite between, say, people of Central African descent and people of Northern European descent are purely explainable by geography and migratory patterns.
Of course people who spent the last 10,000 years (or even a few hundred years) primarily in the same region will have a common recent ancestry and thus have certain genetic markers in common that they do not share with people in a distant region. But almost no human populations have been completely genetically isolated from their neighbors. There is a smooth transition of interbreeding from one region to the next right around the globe. So there are no “boundaries” between “races.”
But 10,000 years is a blink of an eye in evolutionary/biological terms. As travel dissolves geographical boundaries even more, the very concept of “race” will slowly become even more meaningless. I doubt if, 1,000 years from now, it has any meaning at all.
Yes, it is useful for medical purposes to identify genetically related groups, and so, yes, they will still talk of “race” as a shorthand for “ancestry”. But they still use language like “African-Americans” to stress that this is purely an issue of ancestry and geography. There are lots of diseases associated with other ancestral groups that are not defined as “races”, such as Celiac disease (associated with people of Irish descent), Thalassemia (affecting mediteranean groups … Italians, Greeks, middle-eastern descent), Niemann-Pick disease (affecting people of French-Acadian descent in Nova Scotia), etc. So medical studies on the frequency of a disease in an ancestral or geographic group is not evidence of “race.”
Now, in all of this I’m speaking purely about biology. In sociology, race is a much bigger issue, as this brings in issues of culture and history (collective memory of past events). But from the point of view of pure biology, Homo sapiens cannot be subclassified into meaningfully defined “races.”
Replying to Iceman’s comment: no one on our side argues “pure race.” They argue “race.”
I’ve never argued against “pure-race” replacement, only against “race”-replacement. We take the races as we find them, regardless of this or that race’s racial genealogy.
Every race has a genealogy. Having a genealogy doesn’t mean, as the other side believes it means, that a race is a legitimate target for being turned by the Jews and allied plotters into mystery meat without the informed consent of the population so targeted.
Regarding the Jewish quasi-religious tenet that has it that “there are no such things as races,” that’s not something the Jews have deduced from observation or evidence, it’s a postulate they assume (or, pretend to assume) at the outset, then attempt to create as many epicycles as are needed to “preserve the appearances” (to account for the reality we see around us). It’s false Jewish science whose raison d’être is to serve as a weapon in the Jewish tribal war of extermination of Eurochristians.
Replying to Maverick: Negroes and Euros are properly categorized not as distinct races but distinct species. That they aren’t so categorized is political.
lol at Maverick.
I didn’t tell him to post here, I just showed him the link, but that’s fine. If you notice, directly before his article is an article that I created based on the comments that originated in this thread. (Metal Gear = Iceman)
If Maverick is Jewish he’s merely prosecuting a Jewish tribal war of genocide against Euros. If he’s a white, he’s a pathetic dupe.
Iceman, why in the world do you endeavor to attract assholes to post here? I for one wish you wouldn’t. Please stop.
Useful exchange cannot be had with assholes. You’ve succeeded in sabotaging a potentially interesting thread.
Iceman, JWH put you in your place at his blog. Take the hint. Something’s not quite right with your brain. What in the hell could be your motive in going out of your way to bring that piece of excrement here?????
Also, what was your reason for creating the strawman of “pure races” (whatever those are supposed to be) then pretending to argue against the concept? You have to be a feeblemind to do that, or someone bent on sabotaging the thread. And you go around hawking yourself as an expert on genetics? You’re as much an asshole as you friend Maverick and you’re a genetics know-nothing.
I would suggest Prozium send Iceman packing. He is and always has been a one-hundred percent zero.
I second that, Fred! Every notice anything Fade creates or starts turns to shit when every Iceman worms his way in? He’s like Midas Touch in reverse! When I log on to this blog I come here to read Fade’s thoughts on racial matters and not the ramblings of this Jew Iceman and his constant crying of leftish garbage like “pure races don’t exist” and “Jews are European” and other garbage; besides he’s an idiot anyway, of course pure races exist and Jews are DEFINITELY NOT European! The fact that Iceman thinks that German women raped by the Soviet, in his own words, “got what they deserved”. If Fade has any sense he’d ban this bolshevik!
from http://erectuswalksamongst.us/Chap28.html
JWH is a joke and he knows it. I’ve outdebated him so many times that I can’t even count.
Why does JWH hide his blog from the public? Answer, when he opens it, he makes an ass out of himself!
I’m starting with your second post …
1.) “Race” is a level of genetic variation below the level of species. It can be used interchangeably with subspecies, breed, variety, etc. Darwin used “race” in this sense in On the Origin of Species and The Descent of Man. It was the central mechanism in his theory of evolution.
2.) Human populations were genetically isolated from each other for tens of thousands of years on different continents.
3.) I’m not seeing your point. The difference in height and weight between two brothers might be greater than the average difference between the human races, but the two brothers are still far more closely related, genetically speaking, than two random strangers of different races.
4.) Re: Scandinavians and Central Africans. Racial differences are adapations to climate, yes.
5.) Re: Boundries. Since the days of Linnaeus and Blumbenbach, no one has claimed there are perfectly distinct boundries between races, breeds, varieties. Race is a level of hereditary variation below the level of species.
6.) The last 10,000 years encompasses all of human civilization since the rise of agriculture. Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending argue in their new book The 10,000 Year Explosion that human evolution has rapidly accelerated since the end of the last Ice Age.
7.) The human races are growing further apart:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article3031104.ece
8.) “African-Americans” are still distinguished from whites on the basis of racial differences in appearance.
9.) There are television advertisements all the time now that warn of the side effects of certain medications on “Africans” or “Asians.” Clearly, we are not “all the same” under the skin.
10.) Neil Risch was able to classify individuals into different races on the basis of their genetics with over a 99% accuracy rate.
Moving on to your first post . . .
1.) I see litte evidence that we are moving towards a world government. The Japanese don’t want to be governed by the Chinese, Pakistanis by Indians, Jews by Arabs, Americans by Europeans, etc. The U.N. is essentially the same organization today that it was half a century ago.
2.) The historically ignorant are apparently unaware that international trade is nothing new. It has waxed and waned across history with the rise and fall of empires. These people forget that the last push towards world free trade ended in the Great Depression and World Wars.
3.) Race does exist. Forensic anthropologists classify the race of different suspects for law enforcement agencies all the time.
4.) Prominent anthropologist George Gill disagrees:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/gill.html
5.) From the link above:
“Slightly over half of all biological/physical anthropologists today believe in the traditional view that human races are biologically valid and real.”
6.) The American Anthropological Association includes “cultural anthropologists” whose central organizing concept – culture – is even more ambiguous than race. Where does one culture become another? Isn’t the diversity of views within a culture greater than the average difference between cultures? What is the definition of “African-American” culture?
7.) Actually, Cavalli-Sforza’s “populations” (another euphemism for race, breed, variety, continent based ancestral groups, etc) correspond to the major races of traditional physical anthropology.
8.) Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs, and Steel is replete with historical errors. I discussed this in depth on my previous blog.
9.) The racial classifications made by modern geneticists like Neil Risch are more accurate than ever before.
Please note the irony of someone coming from an “interracial” website for “people of color” telling us that “race does not exist.”
Prozium wrote:
“The genome of Neanderthals, which are classified as a separate species, is over 99% indentical to that of modern humans. More proof that “race doesn’t exist.””
Please! The scientists don’t say Neanderhtals are 99% genetically identical to humans. They say there is 99% OVERLAP, meaning 99% of the gene sequences have a CORRELATE in the human genome. That’s not particularly surprising.
Before you try to disprove the fact that race doesn’t exist – which most population geneticists EXPLICITLY agree on, by the way – please at least do your research.
HPWW,
I see your point. There has never been human races, subspecies, breeds, varieties, “populations,” “continent-based ancestral groups,” etc. Unlike every other organism on earth, Homo sapiens sprung into existence de novo, as we are told by the Book of Genesis. This preserves the “psychic unity of mankind.”
BTW, I forgot to mention that I was quoting Paabo:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Neanderthal-Genome-Has-Started-to-Reveal-its-Secrets-40275.shtml
“Our finding that the Neanderthal and human genomes are at least 99.5 % identical led us to develop and successfully implement a targeted method for recovering specific ancient DNA sequences,” said Paabo.
Some further thoughts on race . . .
1.) The essential difference between racialists and humanists lies in the boundries of altruism. The humanist inclination to extend the boundries of the “in-group” to the entire human species, as opposed to a family, tribe, nation, or race, is nothing more than a universalist fetish.
2.) An observation: only in the case in the human species do we hear such passionate, heated denunciations of the maliciousness of racial classifications. The existence of proposed races or subspecies amongst dogs, squirrels, gorillas, etc. can be discussed dispassionately without chants of “racism” and “bigotry.” This is because “anti-racists” are motivated primarily by the political ideologies of liberalism and humanism.
3.) The attack on racial classifications is disingenuous.
– We constantly hear that “race” is an invalid construct because races shade into each other. Well, the same is true of “cultures” which are even vaguer and harder to define, but the same objection is never raised by anti-racists. All sorts of categories exist along a continuum (colors, temperature), but the same reasoning is never invoked to attack these constructs.
– After claiming that “race” is too ambiguous to define, the same anti-racists often immediately relapse into making traditional racial classifications.
Yes, it’s pretty clear that the colour spectrum decisively proves that Colour Does Not Exist. What are you, some kind of evil Colourist?
It looks like we have to get rid of “hot” and “cold” too.
I would suggest Prozium send Iceman packing. He is and always has been a one-hundred percent zero.
I suggested the very same to Prozium when he reestablished this blog.
The day you graduate with a bachelor’s degree in IFS and design websites that are half as complicated as mine, then you can think about calling me a zero!
It is funny how people on the internet go off about their alleged intelligence levels and abilities. I say talk is cheap, don’t tell me, show me. And I guarantee you couldn’t do anything more complicated than writing posts about Jews while I can design my own media formats which combat your elementary posts.
You’re not only an asshole, Iceman, and a low-IQ moron, you’re weird to boot. You have essentially zero to say of interest on any topic. Furthermore, most of what you touch you get wrong to one degree or another.
Everyone should read the free online book Erectus Walks Amonst Us linked above in comment #15 by Lenny. The book’s title page and table of contents are here:
http://erectuswalksamongst.us/index.html#Contents
Yes there are things in this book experts on our side like JWH will object to. No matter: those are a small fraction of the immense store of essential knowledge, wisdom, and truth it will impart to you if you read it carefully. What’s in this book is essential knowledge. No one in today’s world can afford to be without it. READ THIS BOOK. IT’S FREE ONLINE. Any objections to technical details? Read it first, absorb its fund of knowledge, and look into those details later.
I’m not saying the Out of Africa theory is wrong. I supported it until I began to waver after reading Ronald Fonda’s web-site a couple of years ago. Whether it’s wrong or right makes no difference to the fact that forced race-replacement is a cataclysmic evil-beyond-the-power-of-words-to-describe genocidal crime, the worst crime not of the millennium, not of the past ten thousand years, not of the past million years, or two million, but the worst crime since the Big Bang (and perpetrated by the Jews, in my view, the biggest criminals since the universe started expanding) or to the fact that everyone needs to absorb the knowledge contained in this book. Out of Africa or multiregional makes no difference to the need for resistance to the current Out of Israel forced race-replacement régime: if it were shown conclusively that all four of my grandparents were gorillas, would that mean I should become a gorilla? No, it would mean that was intersesting how that could have come about that four gorillas produced a person in two generations but in no way should that person go back to gorillahood and the Jews’ trying to force him back to gorillahood is the biggest crime in this history of the universe. That’s what it means.
Actually, “subspecies” is an outmoded concept, not “race”:
http://stephenbodio.blogspot.com/2009/02/what-definition-of-species-is.html
(…)
“So subspecies are a relic of 1950’s species concepts. I know they still teach in biology (even university bio) that for something to be a species it has to be reproductively isolated from other similar groups. Conversely then if two groups are able to reproduce they were the same species. The concept of a subspecies was a way for a taxonomist to be like these things mate just fine, but they look different, have different ranges, etc. Since biological species concept has gone the way of the dinosaurs, in the real world we now operate under about 20 different species concepts and subspecies as such are no longer necessary. In fact what most people think of as subspecies are no more than races. May sound like a wording difference but the two are not even remotely the same. Subspecies, as a taxonomic unit, implies a monophyletic grouping while a race does not. There have been some interesting papers looking at subspecies in birds and in some papers up to 97% of the recognized subspecies looked at are not monophyletic. Most of us these days ask a series of questions before describing a new species or revising old ones. The two I ask as a follower of the phylogenetic species concept are 1) is the group diagnosably different and 2) is it following its own evolutionary path. Question 1 means I need to be able to look at a specimen and say this belongs to morphgroup x. Not based on range, not based on behavior, based on actual morphological/molecular evidence. Question 2 determines if the group is monophyletic or not. If the group is in question meets the 2 criteria it’s a valid species. The fact that its able to interbreed with morphgroup y (say in captivity or in hybrid zones) doesn’t mean anything. Since those incidents are rare they don’t affect the overall evolutionary path of the two species.
(…)
Even “species” is somewhat fluid as a concept:
in comments
(…)
It surprises people to find out that Mother Nature does much the same thing. Most people assume a Mallard duck is a Mallard duck. Aren’t all Mallards simply clones of each other?
Well, No. You see, ducks hybridize all the time. What appears to be a Mallard may, in fact, have a little Gadwall crossed into it, or a little Black Duck, or even a bit of Greenwinged duck tucked into its double-helix.
In the duck world, where success is defined in Darwinian terms, there are no closed registries. While animals within a species tend to mate with others of the species in the same area, new blood flies, walks or swims in all the time. In the case of ducks, it may even come from across the ocean — or from an entirely different duck species….
What is true for ducks is true for a lot of animals. Not only will individual animals often travel great distances to find unoccupied territories, they may also cross the species barrier as they do so. A wolf will mate with both a dog AND a coyote, while finches leap across the species barrier at the drop of a hat. A spotted owl will freely mate with a barred owl, while most amazon parrots freely cross-breed. A lion can mate with a tiger and produce fertile offspring, and an African elephant can cross breed with an Asian elephant. A muskellunge will cross with a northern pike, and a sunfish will cross with a bluegill. Trout and salmon species readily hybridize. Many species of hawks and falcons will also cross the species line, while a buffalo will cross with a cow. Just last week a hunter in Alaska shot an animal that turned out to be a cross between a polar bear and a grizzly.
The point here is not that trans-species outcrosses are common, but that even between distinct species Mother Nature often runs her train “loose on the tracks,” and a considerable amount of genetic wobble is allowed.
(…)
I want to show you that there’s no stopping globalization. We will have a one world government and mix races together whether through consent or conquest.
Globalism is inevitable: http://www.freemediaproductions.info/Editorials/?p=315
If globalization is inevitable, why are you sweating? Seriously though, why champion the inevitable? What’s next, people championing the fact that the sky’s blue, and water’s wet?
No, globalism isn’t inevitable. In fact, if whites got their minds right, to any significant degree, they could and would put a stop to it, post-haste.
I reckon a million dedicated white men could do it, easily.
Race does not exist, there’s ample evidence and I have the backing of mainstream and reputable geneticists and organizations:
Nobody here gives a shit which squid-ink spewing geneticists you quote. “Reputable” is a function of “tame” so that doesn’t do anything for us either. Geneticists say one thing, and do another. They’re lying to cover their asses.
Like this isn’t obvious to everyone. 🙂 The political establishment says jump, and they say how high, and the research dollars are safe. Duh.
Prominent anthropologist C. Loring Brace: “There is no such thing as a biological entity that warrants the term ‘race.’”
Brace is full of shit.
The American Association of Physical Anthropologists recently announced: “old biological concepts of race no longer provide scientifically valid distinctions…”
The AAPA is full of shit.
The New York Times has hailed Genes, Peoples, and Languages, the new book by Professor Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0865475296/ref=sim_books/103-0702805-3403066], the dean of population geneticists, for “dismantling the idea of race.” In the New York Review of Books, Jared Diamond salutes Cavalli-Sforza for “demolishing scientists’ attempts to classify human populations into races in the same way that they classify birds and other species into races”
Sforza is full of shit. His book jacket says one thing, and then the text goes on to contradict it. I.e., more squid ink.
Cavalli-Sforza himself wrote: “The classification into races has proved to be a futile exercise.”
Then he goes on to show us a map that, as Steve Sailer points out, looks like someone gave Strom Thurmond a pack of crayons and told him to paint a racial picture of the world.
He says his research will “undermine the popular belief that there are clearly defined races, to contribute to the elimination of racism. The idea of race in the human species serves no purpose.”
He’s deceiving you, you jackass.
If there’s no race, why is racial diversity so important? Obviously, white nationalists are just organizing around something that doesn’t exist, so why do they get everyone’s panties in a bunch?
Do you post on UFO sites too, about how UFOs don’t exist? Why? Because you’re full of shit, too?
If race doesn’t matter, why is it SOOOO goddamn important that I breed with negroids?
The word “race” has no biological definition.
The classification “race” is only applied to humans and is therefore not a general term of biology. In other species we talk of “subspecies” and occasionally “breed” (the result of deliberate breeding efforts).
So substitute “subspecies,” “breed,” or “population,” or whatever euphemism your learning disability requires when I say or write “race”. Problem solved.
Just what problem do you have with white* people living apart from other groups? Do you have a problem with blacks* (who would tell you to fuck off if you told them blacks don’t exist, btw) doing the same? Jews in Israel? Or is it just whites*
*(replace with whatever word your learning disability requires)
These are terms that are defined in terms of genetic isolation, and therefore do not apply to humans.
Lemme get this straight – Swedes didn’t exist for tens of thousands of years in genetic isolation from Bantus?
Fuck…you. Can you grasp that concept? We don’t believe in what you believe. Why is that so goddamned hard for you psychotic, totalitarian leftist hegemons to understand? Why must every particle in the universe vibrate in accordance with your will? Why must every knee bend? Why must every corner of the Earth submit?
Why?
HAVE YOU NO DECENCY, SIR?
Please note the irony of someone coming from an “interracial” website for “people of color” telling us that “race does not exist.”
Oh, you mean Maverick? Ah, that explains his nuttery. I thought about asking if he was married to a non-white, or had something in his woodpile, that was motivating his stupidity, but I decided that was “low” and didn’t. Stupid me.
This is because “anti-racists” are motivated primarily by the political ideologies of liberalism and humanism.
Why do anti-humanists get that word, “humanism”? They oppose every erg of human nature that doesn’t comport with their destructive ways. They actively seek to destroy much of what is finest in man.
Humanist? I think not. They’re anti-humanist. They seem to despise humanity.
Different races have different sounding voices. Why? Has anybody researched this?